Talk:Noble eladrin
Gleemax Reference I'm moving this from Noble eladrin/Archive-AskTheRealmsAuthors, as this is a more fitting location for it. Cronje (talk ⋅ ) 19:23, June 4, 2011 (UTC) Copied from the Gleemax forums on 2008-12-26 and archived here, since Gleemax may not survive. Link to the original: http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=17206868&postcount=338 |- |} Reason for Split So, I just spent several hours researching this, and I believe that this article needs to be split, because "noble eladrin" does not and never did mean "celestial eladrin". The above-quoted comment from Richard Baker does not say that they are; that's a gross misinterpretation. What Richard is describing is something like this: Rich says, "term eladrin refers to a race of fey..." We also know that in 4e, "common" elves are still considered fey. "...who run the gamut from "high elves" -- the most common eladrin..." "Common eladrin" is synonymous with "high elf". I don't think anyone disagrees with this, and it's clear in all the source books as well as in his statement. "-- through various noble or royal beings who include..." Note that he says, "who include," not, "who are." "...some of the 3e types you might remember, such as bralani or ghaele eladrins," So bralanis and ghaeles (celestial eladrin) are noble eladrin, but not all noble eladrin are celestial eladrin. "...and even on up to extremely powerful archfey -- unique individuals who are as powerful as demon princes or archdevils." "Even on up to" separates these other kinds of noble eladrin from the celestial eladrin. Moving beyond Rich's statement to the sourcebooks, Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide calls Ordalf a noble eladrin. She was already established in FR lore as a leShay, thought to be one of the creator races. So FR claims that leShay are noble eladrin. This matches what Rich says just fine, as leShay aren't at all celestial eladrin. In core material, "noble eladrin" are described (''Player's Handbook'' 4 ed., p. 39) as common eladrin infused with Feywild magic to become more powerful. Fair enough, but the celestial eladrin aren't from the Feywild. Even Rich allows for the celestial eladrin to remain in their original plane with high probability. So those on Arvandor are noble eladrin and those in the Feywild are noble eladrin, but they aren't the same creatures. The same page does describe a so-called "ghaele of winter" as a noble eladrin, which at first seems to argue against what I am saying. However, read ''Monster Manual 2'', p. 97. In 4e, "ghaele" and "bralani" and "coure" are not creature types! They are simply titles given to powerful eladrin. The 4e bralani is in no way the same thing as the bralani celestial. As far as I can tell, "noble eladrin" is nowhere given as a stat-ed creature type. It is simply a very broad classification, based on some ultimate genetic relationship. I propose making a page celestial eladrin and modifying this current page. I also think Eladrin should be a disambiguation page or a category redirect, not a redirect to high elf, as noble eladrin should be a sub-category of eladrin. Any objections? ~ Lhynard (talk) 08:07, January 6, 2018 (UTC) :I'm not sure I understand it enough to object. :) But I agree, from those sources, 4e's "noble eladrin" seems no more than a social status for, well, eladrin nobles. :Perhaps further complicating this, Monster Manual 4th edition page 25 briefly mentions "ignoble eladrin" who would work with banshrae. That could be a typo, or it could indicate commoner, dishonourable, or even corrupted eladrin. It seems they were never mentioned again. :Mostly, once again, 4e is a bubble of an edition and it seems best to split these off from the conventional lore. — BadCatMan (talk) 08:36, January 6, 2018 (UTC) ::At the risk of unnecessarily complicating this further, the 5 edition instances of high elves and eladrin do list them as different elf subraces. In particular, the PHB 5 ed. and Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide say that sun and moon elves are branches of high elves, while the DMG 5 ed. says eladrin are their own elf subrace whose main trait is the strong connection to the Feywild and the ability to do their fey step. So I agree that eladrin should not be equated with high elf, but I also don't think "generic" high elves should be called eladrin, since they are distinct in 5e. In this scheme, 5e high elves would fit better under the common elves branch (alongside wood elves, drow, and the other rarer subraces such as avariel etc.), with further subdivisions into sun and moon elves, while 5e eladrin are the "common" eladrin branch. How does that sound? — Sirwhiteout (talk) 13:52, January 6, 2018 (UTC) :::"…I also don't think "generic" high elves should be called eladrin,…" :::Well, the fact of the matter is that they are called that in 4e, but with the sometimes qualifier "common" as opposed to "noble". :::This isn't really a problem, though. In the real world, we call the family of animals that includes wolves and foxes and dogs dogs. So the word "dog" can refer either to the whole family or to a small subset of that family. So there is no problem calling Queen Ordalf an eladrin, even though her race is leShay and still also using the word "eladrin" to refer to a specific race of high elves who can fey step. :::Currently, Eladrin redirects to high elf, which I think is wrong, and I think you would agree with that. If 5e eladrin as a subrace show up in the 5e FR, then we can make an Eladrin (race) article, whereas, Eladrin will be more like a disambiguation/classification page like this one now is. :::But isn't the eladrin in the 5e DMG simply an example of how a DM could hypothetically create a subrace? I don't think that is enough to argue that they exist in the Realms. Although, it makes sense that, post-Second Sundering, some of the eladrin elves living through it maintained the fey abilities that they had gained from post-Spellplague. Anyhow, I think we need another source before worrying about an Eladrin (race) article, but you can answer that better than I, as you are the 5e expert. :::~ Lhynard (talk) 15:16, January 7, 2018 (UTC) The deed here is done. I am quite happy with the result, if I may say so for myself. ~ Lhynard (talk) 15:16, January 7, 2018 (UTC)